MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079835361 · doi:10.3390/su6118262

A Preliminary Forecast of the Production Status of China’s Daqing Oil field from the Perspective of EROI

2014· article· en· W2079835361 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Xu, Lianyong Feng, William Wei, Yan Hu, Jianliang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
FundersNational Social Science Fund of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsProduction (economics)Fossil fuelNatural resource economicsChinaInvestment (military)Return on investmentEnvironmental scienceEnergy intensityEnergy (signal processing)EconomicsEngineeringGeographyMathematicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Energy return on investment (EROI) and net energy are useful metrics for analyzing energy production physically rather than monetarily. However, these metrics are not widely applied in China. In this study, we forecast the Daqing oilfield’s EROI from 2013 to 2025 using existing data for crude oil and natural gas production and the basic rules of EROI. Unfortunately, our calculations indicate that the oilfield’s EROI will continuously decline from 7.3 to 4.7, and the associated net energy will continuously decline from 1.53 × 1012 MJ to 1.25 × 1012 MJ. If China’s energy intensity does not decline as planned in the next ten years, then the EROI of Daqing will be even lower than our estimates. Additionally, relating the EROI to the monetary return on investment (MROI) in a low production and high intensity scenario, Daqing’s EROI will decline to 2.9 and its MROI will decline to 1.8 by 2025. If the “law of minimum EROI” and the assumed “minimum MROI” are taken into account, then we estimate that both energy pressure and economic pressure will restrict Daqing’s production by 2025.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207